Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: bushpilot1

“Naturels to the Founders did not mean simply the word natural..to them the term mean natural born.”

Then one must ask WHY they added ‘born’ to what OBVIOUSLY translates ‘natural’ or, applied to a people, ‘native’. And the only plausible answer is its relation to the English common law term “natural born subject”.

AND the phase translated NB is NOT naturels, but indigenous...


85 posted on 06/22/2010 7:37:20 PM PDT by Mr Rogers (When the ass brays, don't reply...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies ]


To: Mr Rogers
AND the phase translated NB is NOT naturels, but indigenous...

The French word "indigenes" does not appear in that section of the Convention with the French. Only "naturales". So only "naturales" can have been translated as "natural born".

"indigenes" may be translated as "natives" or "indigeonous ones".

Interestingly, I just put the 1797 translation into an on line translator. It was having trouble going from French to English, but when I put in the English sentence

"The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens"

I got:

"Les indigènes, ou les citoyens naturels, sont ceux nés dans le pays, des parents qui sont des citoyens"

So clearly "natives" was translated as "indigènes" and "natural born citizens" was translated as "citoyens naturels".

That compares very well to the original French that the 1797 translator was working from:

Les naturels, ou indigenes, sont ceux qui sont nés dans le pays de parents citoyens

213 posted on 06/24/2010 4:47:37 PM PDT by El Gato ("The second amendment is the reset button of the US constitution"-Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson